Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘manifest’ operates as a technical term marking the threshold between the visible surface of psychic life and its concealed generative substrate. Freud establishes the foundational polarity: the manifest dream-content is the remembered, consciously accessible narrative, always already a disguised transcript of the latent dream-thoughts produced by the dream-work through condensation, displacement, and considerations of representability. For Freud, the manifest is epistemologically suspect — a censored substitute whose relationship to the latent is never simple, never one-to-one. Jung inherits this distrust of surface appearance but redirects it: in alchemical psychology and in the phenomenology of the unconscious, what is manifest and what is occult trade places depending on the medium — silver conceals what gold reveals, and vice versa — making manifestation a function of symbolic register rather than mere repression. Von Franz extends this into cosmological territory, drawing on Chinese thought to argue that the manifest world is what has already crystallized out of invisible archetypal patterns or ‘seeds.’ Sri Aurobindo approaches manifestation as an ontological act of the Absolute, which cannot be bound either to manifest or not to manifest a cosmos. Damasio approaches the manifest from a neurological angle, noting that perceptual images appear always from the perspective of the sensing body. Across these traditions, the term anchors a persistent tension between appearance and depth, surface and source, the legible and the occult.